Mini 776: End of the World Zombie Survivors Mafia: Abandoned

[Diamondilium]

Vote: OozingGolfBall

because she's the only player who has posted so far and I'm too lazy to look at the player list.

[Diamondilium]

Actually. I can agree with that. I see a flaw in your logic,
Any other choice would be random, but we -know- diamond is not responsible enough. His very first post proved that without a doubt.

We need someone to have it though and I would gladly give it to semioldguy as they give me a very pro-town vibe right now. And they have to be more responsible then Diamond.

Ok, this is ridiculous. I made one post that indicated I was inattentive and suddenly your assuming I'm irresponsible enough not to even be considered for the gun. One post is not enough to make a judgment call like that on my play style; if you had a collection of my posts to examine, then I would certainly be ok with your thoughts. If you really want to get a feel for how I play then look at games I've been in. I've only been in one so far; so here's the link. I encourage all to read or skim through it.

Anyway, this whole the mod chose a random person thing is illogical. Our gun shot is essentially our lynch and there's a reason why we just don't randomly choose our lynch. We would be better off in terms of giving the gun to a) people who are going to kill people we suspect or b) that read townie and are capable enough to think situations through and nail scum. Sure the scum can influence who gets the gun, but we can determine what makes a good candidate ourselves and plus we can try to see through scum's ploys and catch them in the process. Randomly selecting a gun owner won't reveal nearly as much information.

^again protown.

Give this guy the gun please.

A few questions:
a) Are you serious or joking around? It appears to me that you are serious but clarification is necessary.
b) If you are serious, do you feel like we should give semioldguy the gun now? If so why now?
c) You said before that

Gun : Semioldguy

Protown reasoning for trying to stick with the mods random vote.
I prefer not to try to control the vig though, so fire away.

Shame : everyone else making a random number vote

. Own upto your votes, dont blame the random numbers generator.

Also Lowell's logic is pretty awesome but I will choose to ignore it.

Do you agree that we shouldn't tell the vig to shoot or that we should stick with the mods random vote. If you are saying that you agree to stick with the mods random vote, then why are you voting for semioldguy and not the mod's random selection?

[Diamondilium]

EBWOP:
I forgot to mention that I find it too early to decide on who should get the gun. I would rather have more to analyze before making a decision like that.

[Diamondilium]

I do not need more. Here is a break down of what I see. Feel free to correct me if I have the mechanics wrong.

-We have one person with a gun. Decided this week.
-After the "Gun Phase" We do normal lynching.
-Lynching proceeds as normal with the single exception, that the person with the gun can at any time kill another player.

Now with these facts we know the gun needs to be where we can trust. I completely agree. This is day one though and we know nothing yet. So that is not a completely viable option.

So all we can do is say where do we think it should not go. Diamond, you missed the opening post... the opening post of our day... I mean... the -very- first post that starts off our day. If you managed to miss that, you are not the best person for the gun.

The simple fact you seem to want to have the responsibility when you can see your own error worries me.

Would I want it, absolutely not, I am not experienced enough not to fall for some trap and accidentally kill someone.

So names that don't deserve it so far really are
-Gateway - Lack of experience means not knowledgeable to aim the gun.
-Diamondilium - Fell behind on the -very first post-, not who we need with a loaded gun.

I don't believe the mod said that we would be having a normal after the gun is given but he never said we weren't having a lynch. I assumed that electing a gun owner would act as lynch, but I can see it working as essentially electing a power role.

Mod are we lynching after the gun owner is selected?

Did you not read or look over my other game? All you did here was reiterate what you have said before, and as I said before, that one post is not nearly enough to judge me by.
Bolded:Where did I say that I should be the gun owner? This is a misrepresentation. In fact, I even posted and said that I wasn't sure who should get the gun. I acknowledge that I was being inattentive, but you are greatly overexaggerating on the post and assuming way too much about my playstyle from it.

[Diamondilium]

You have a gun, and one bullet. You may point the loaded gun at another survivor during the day, when you are all gathered in the common area, and pull the trigger. This will kill them.

To kill someone, post

KILL: PLAYERNAME

in the game thread. This power will not work after a majority of votes to lynch has been placed, even if I haven't counted the votes. It will not work after a deadline to lynch expires.

[/color]

It is clearly the mod letting us elect who gets this role before the lynch. If you yourself found it unclear, why do you want the gun?

Don't you feel it should go to a player we at least feel won't make a mistake based on a misread?

I myself don't want it, so why do you Diamond?

Um I was asking whether we were given the option of lynching right after the gun owner was selected instead of it going to night... that's not clearly stated. What you quoted merely explains the mechanics of the gun.

Of course I think we shouldn't pick a player who is going to misread, but just because a player misreads once I am not going to assume the player based on that one post but rather a collection of them.

Once again your misrepresenting me, where did I say that I wanted it? I even stated that I had not decided on who I thought should get the gun.

I like semioldguy's plan. It puts the mafia at a disadvantage; if we hit scum with both the gun shot and the lynch we could seriously cripple them. In addition your plan deals with some of the pitfalls the gun owner ship could have: an uncooperative gun owner, purposeful misuse and prevents the gun owner from being nightkilled and thus prevents the ability from being wasted.

[Diamondilium]

Also @ Diamond: I do not think you are playing poorly in any way. I just (before semi's recent plan) wanted it in the hands of someone that doesn't miss a single word. It is to powerful. As it stands now, forget I said anything and we should go with semi's plan.

You can agree with that plan and join us in giving semi the gun then, right Diamond?

I certainly agree with the plan but I want to give the gun to some one who not only agrees to the plan, but is townie, and can think through situations. And, I'm not sure if semioldguy is the best candidate.

b) If you are serious, do you feel like we should give semioldguy the gun now? If so why now?

as opposed to when? I'm not following the question. I voted for to give it to him doesnt that speak for itself?

As opposed to later (from when you posted it), when all of the players had weighed in or at least there was more to analyze.

EEM, although there are disadvantages to the plan (namely scum influence on the gun-lynch), the benefits would outweigh the advantages. If the gun was just used as a one-shot vig, we won't have nearly as much information to analyze as we would if it is used as a lynch. Not only that, but if it is used as a lynch, there is less of a chance that the gun owner is killed or otherwise stopped by the mafia before he or she can fire.

[Diamondilium]

ungun, gun semioldguy

. To get this moving.

The double-lynch plan is intriguing, but I'd rather he just kill someone he thinks is scummy. Less complicated, less bickering. Let's lynch someone.

Why do you think we need to get this moving now? There are still 5 days left to decide.

Letting the gun owner kill some one he thinks is scummy may seem less complicated and may produce less bickering but that doesn't make it better.

[Diamondilium]

Question for Amished and Shinnen_no_Me: What do you think of all this having happened without either of you saying anything about it?

Also I would like to stress everyone to be careful about putting anyone at L-1 too early. If that person is scum they may rationalize their fate as being sealed and could self hammer to keep the town from getting an extra kill today. This would also apply to a townie if there is a scum player not on the wagon yet who wants to end the day without a gun use. Another reason to keep someone from L-1 too early is that by doing that you could limit who I can shoot without ending the day in an auto-lynch immediately after my shot. Unless something strange happens, I intend to shoot someone today.

The self-hammer point is interesting. Maybe we should use another voting system where the votes aren't actually lynching votes- at least until the gun shot is used up. That way, the scum can't self-hammer before the shot.

[Diamondilium]

I apologize for not posting in this game sooner. In two other ongoing games I said I was going to be away for the weekend, and then for this game I screwed up and assumed that it was in Little Italy as I didn't realize that Coney Island used "mini" naming conventions too. I would've thought that it was titled slightly differently. Anyways, I'm here now.

As to the giving of the gun, I personally find it disconcerting. Particularly the end of the voting. OGBall's lack of really stating anything as his opinion towards why you (SOGuy) should get the gun in particular makes me wary. It seems like he just wanted to appear pro-town (agreeing with a large number of townies) without actually giving any opinion on the matter. Rishi just finishing off "the inevitable" is a point against him as well in my book. Nothing is "inevitable" until a majority agrees. Certainly it is inevitable after giving it to you, but to just hop on at the end and saying (in my eyes) "this will stifle discussion that was rather productive" is interesting.

For the L-1 gunning, I don't know if that's the right way to go. I feel that it will just make it easier for scum to pressure somebody and get a role-claim out of them, and if it's a worthless claim in their eyes they can abandon it or reduce their heavy opponents (referring to anti-scum power roles). As Semi has the gun now, I'm thinking that he should go after somebody who he thinks is scum and then force him to account for his actions and reasoning after it is done. That way we can also decide if it was truly a pro-town kill, or if there was something shady to do.

In other words: It seems like it'll add another deadline. I've seen several of the newbie games just go down the crapper because of deadlines and forced action due to not allowing the town to fully explore all the possibilities in depth, and auto-vigging the L-1 seems to make that into another deadline while we already have one that we have to worry about.

Also, hi to Gateway, musher, and Shinnen, and then the rest of you.

You mentioned both DGB, and Rishi and points against them, but you don't vote. Why?

vote hero. Let's not try to outguess the mod or add confusing restrictions on voting that will make an already short timeframe even shorter.

Outguessing the mod, confusing restriction, shorter time frame? How does it do any of those? I personally find it to be an effective way around the self-hammer factor.

[Diamondilium]

@Diamond - No one is voting except for Lowell (well, Gateway is voting now but wasn't when you made your post), so why single out Amished for not voting?

It seemed to me that he was either took careful consideration with his votes, or not (meaning he had not voted for ulterior reasons). His response indicated that he is somewhat cautious with his votes, but I am checking up on his completed games to see if that's true.

@gateway- my vote wasn't random. I don't like the way hero wants us to set up a needlessly confusing kill mechanism that will (frankly) only encourage people to pay less attention. We dont' have that long to make a decision, and NO ONE is voting. hero is being anti-town by delaying the process of trying to get someone lynched.

That is just poor logic; waiting to last minute to solve the self-hammer problem isn't going to yield a town consensus as quickly as solving the problem now simply because people will be more preoccupied with scum hunting later. And, this doesn't delay "someone getting lynched" since we are going to have to deal with it eventually anyway. This explanation for your vote while not paticularly logical does make me think that you genuinely believe in your vote.

[Diamondilium]

Honestly? My opinion is "who cares", a lynch is a lynch.

I do know that we're on page 5 and only two people have voted. So, you know, maybe this doesn't matter yet.

This is a blatant exaggeration of the game state. Three of those pages were gun discussing, which means we've essentially at the beginning of the actual game.

I think Lowell was trying to say that we are still technically very early in the game.

[Diamondilium]

I think that was a loaded question by Herodotus. Neither (a) or (b) is necessarily the best answer.

I think you mean "false dilemma" rather than "loaded question." Those are probably not be the only possibilities, though my phrasing could be taken to suggest that they are. TBH, I can't think of any more sensible options under those conditions, but if anyone has any, they should share. I just wanted to see Lowell's response first.

At this point, I don't know how to interpret Lowell's answer in 116. "Who cares, a lynch is a lynch" is such a

stereotypically

scummy thing to say, I would normally think it was WIFOM written by scum or a jester.

However in the context of the question I was asking, it may have been intended either as meaning the answer I called (a), or offering some third option. I wish he'd been more clear, but it's a little late for that now since later answers are less useful than first responses.

But to review, he originally non-random voted me over a suggestion that would help prevent us from losing the chance to use the gun kill constructively, and used absolutely horrible logic in doing so. (It's too confusing? Then what are you doing playing mafia? Do you vote first thing in LYLO because it's too confusing to remember not to?) Then in post 113, he has ignored my post 108, and maybe even insinuates that it's my fault that no one is voting* -- even though my suggestion only applies after a player has 5 votes on them. This made me think he might be scum.

* I'm not sure whether that was his intent, but the more I analyze post 113, the more it seems to be the case.

I generally try to avoid placing OMGUS votes in case I'm subconsciously biased, but Lowell looks scummy.

Vote: Lowell

Bolded: I'm not following you here; what makes Lowell's answer stereotypically scummy?

Also, IMO bad logic isn't necessarily scummy. In many situations, poor logic simply indicates a poor thought process. However, in some cases poor logic can be used intentionally to push forward scummy actions. I dont think that's the case here.

[Diamondilium]

Lowell, do you still find Herodotus scummy for the you listed before?

[Diamondilium]

EBWOP:
...Hero scummy for the *reasons* you listed...

[Diamondilium]

I am convinced Lowell is either dumb scum, anti-town, or a joker (which I hear many mods won't use so I'll ignore that option)

I feel confident a few more votes may get tagged on to him, before we let him get to L-1 lets try to find another target as well.

Will try to focus my attention elsewhere after a reread tonight. Hero, SOG, and Diamond have all three been people I've noticed adding to the conversation a lot, so I would like to hear your three opinions of other options as well. (if they were stated in the last page ignore this and I will catch it when I really read it tonight, instead of skim today.)

While I don't agree that Lowell is going to garner enough votes to be the vig target just yet I'm reading town on Gateway for this. He seems to be over eager- something I would expect from a townie. I considered the possibility of him being scum rushing to the night by essentially trying to confirm this early that Lowell will be the target, but that doesn't seem likely. His overzealousness is consistent with his actions before we were able to cast lynching votes thus making it seem less likely that his eager behavior is about rushing to the night. Also in many cases the newer players will tend to be more eager than experienced players, and Gateway has acknowledged that he is not that experienced.

@Hero, If your not voting Lowell for post 116 then why exactly are you voting? Could you please list all of your reasons?

Also, Lowell, please answer my question in posts 132-133.

[Diamondilium]

I don't agree with the case on Lowell.

@Herodotus - What do you think of Rishi so far?

Neither do I, and neither does Hero I suspect.

@Hero, If your not voting Lowell for post 116 then why exactly are you voting? Could you please list all of your reasons?

I tried to explain my reasoning in post 122. I'm not sure if a list format is the best way to handle it, but here goes. It's that:
1. He's using very poor logic to pursue a case.
2. He's opposing what I consider to be the ideal strategy for the town on the basis that it's a confusing restriction, and shortens our available time, when I've already explained why it's none of those.
3. By calling it confusing to stop real-voting at L-2, he might be laying a foundation to act confused and deny SOG the opportunity to use the gun.
4. In post 113, he seems to suggest that I was the reason no one was voting because either my strategy, or the fact that I was discussing strategy, was "being anti-town by delaying the process of trying to get someone lynched." In fact, there was nothing about my idea that prevented voting (up to the point of 5 votes on one player,) and if he's so anxious to make a lynch, then he should support having what is effectively two lynches -- especially since the first may make the second more effective.
One new reason:
5. A vote can serve the extra purpose of being an in-game prod. He hasn't said much other than his case on me. Four of his nine posts so far have contained anything meaningful, and three of those fall into the categories of my other reasons for voting him. Other people have posted less, but he's earned a spotlight.

I read this in conjunction with your post 122 to ensure that I was getting a clear picture.
It seems kind of odd to me that you said you agreed with me on that logic tells are not necessarily scummy but when listing your first reason* you merely state he is using bad logic.
*I guess you could also include the second and fourth reasons because they are the direct result of Lowell's poor logic.
Argument #3 is a stretch: it is possible that he is laying the foundation for being confused, but using his confusion to stop Semioldguy is a pretty large assumption. At best, this point is weak.
Also, I don't believe you when you say that you are not voting Lowell for the answer he gave. If you had wanted to vote him for reasons separate than his answer then you could have voted him in post 115. The only difference between voting him in post 115 and post 122 was that Lowell had posted his answer in between them. It seems to me that you asked Lowell a question (which seems to have been loaded as Semi had pointed out) hoping to get a scummy response in order to make it seem as if your vote had more justification.

Vote: Hero

[Diamondilium]

Just to be clear, the central argument of my case was that it didn't seem as if Hero had genuinely believed in his case against Lowell, and didn't suspect Lowell nearly as much as it seemed. What is now being called a contradiction was never actually intended to be a point about a contradiction but rather to act as one of the premises for that central argument (Hero didn't think that logic was necessarily scummy but much of his reasoning against Lowell was about Lowell's poor logic therefore Hero didn't genuinely believe Lowell was scummy for those points).
On point #3 my response was meant to be a trap:

@Hero, If your not voting Lowell for post 116 then why exactly are you voting? Could you please list all of your reasons?

I tried to explain my reasoning in post 122. I'm not sure if a list format is the best way to handle it, but here goes. It's that:
3. By calling it confusing to stop real-voting at L-2, he might be laying a foundation to act confused and deny SOG the opportunity to use the gun.
Argument #3 is a stretch: it is possible that he is laying the foundation for being confused, but using his confusion to stop Semioldguy is a pretty large assumption. At best, this point is weak.

Also, I don't believe you when you say that you are not voting Lowell for the answer he gave. If you had wanted to vote him for reasons separate than his answer then you could have voted him in post 115. The only difference between voting him in post 115 and post 122 was that Lowell had posted his answer in between them. It seems to me that you asked Lowell a question (which seems to have been loaded as Semi had pointed out) hoping to get a scummy response in order to make it seem as if your vote had more justification.

Vote: Hero

When looking back at Hero post 122 I didn't see anything similar to piont #3. I suspected that he had made this point up. In order to see if it was, I responded and awaited to see if Hero would bring evidence from earlier in the thread or expound on that point

specifically

as he did with the other points. He didn't; instead he just talked about his points in general in response to #3.
Hero, could you please answer your own question from post 115?

Another scummy thing Hero did actually came in response to the pressure from both Semi and I. First came his unvote of Lowell and vote on EEM along with a question. I originally thought that he actually had become more suspicious of EEM. But then, later on he unvoted EEM when evil had answered his question, yet didn't revote Lowell.

[Diamondilium]

You seem to be ignoring the nature of the request you made in post 146. You asked for all of the reasons that I was voting Lowell. The present perfect tense means you seemed to be asking for my reasons at that time. If you wanted my original reasoning, it's all in post 122. I think points 1, 2, and 4 correspond to that; let me check when I return home. My third point came about when I was thinking about the game, after my original vote. I listed it in post 147 because when I wrote that post, it was one of the reasons I had my vote on Lowell. I first mentioned it in post 139, before your request for my reasons.

didn't suspect Lowell nearly as much as it seemed

This is probably true; however I don't think I'm to blame for some people misunderstanding the degree of my suspicion. Also, how is it a scumtell for me to vote for someone I'm not 100% certain is scum?

Hero, could you please answer your own question from post 115?

Suppose that you wanted a particular player dead, that player was at L-2, SOG hadn't used the gun yet, and we weren't close to deadline.
Would you more likely (a) vote that player right away, or (b) say "I believe player X should die. Either do it, or tell us you aren't going to, Semioldguy," and then place your vote if SOG refused?

My answer is (b). No question; I think it's best to make sure SOG isn't shut out from using the gun by poorly timed votes. Also, I think you already knew that was my answer. You, SOG, and I were discussing this on page 4.

I didn't revote Lowell because I first want to reread the thread to see if anyone else is more suspicious than he is. At the time, I was thinking Kabenon might be, for reasons I explained in the post immediately before my unvote. I want to see what he has to say, and reread, before I decide.

The wagon on me started with poor logic, as most people seem to agree. Frankly, I think the logic is getting even more strained, and it seems based on misreading. Is this whole wagon designed to prove a point about bad logic not being a scumtell?

Ok, your defense on point #3 is good and I admit that I am wrong there, however, everything else I said before still stands.
Saying that the ensuing case on you is the result of misunderstanding of your degree of suspicious (which certainly is a possibility) does not undermine the arguments made against you. You took my argument out of context. Here is what I said in its entiriety:

Just to be clear, the central argument of my case was that

it didn't seem as if Hero had genuinely believed in his case against Lowell,

and didn't suspect Lowell nearly as much as it seemed.

What is now being called a contradiction was never actually intended to be a point about a contradiction but rather to act as one of the premises for that central argument (Hero didn't think that logic was necessarily scummy but much of his reasoning against Lowell was about Lowell's poor logic therefore Hero didn't genuinely believe Lowell was scummy for those points).

Hero completely ignores the 1st part of my central argument.
Saying "Also, how is it a scumtell for me to vote for someone I'm not 100% certain is scum?" is blatant misrepresentation. Where does certainty come into play here; I said that you don't believe in your case and that you don't suspect Lowell as much as it seems.
Also saying that "The wagon on me started with poor logic, as most people seem to agree. Frankly, I think the logic is getting even more strained, and it seems based on misreading. Is this whole wagon designed to prove a point about bad logic not being a scumtell?" is noted as an underhanded attempt to discredit the case. Saying the wagon was built to prove a point about bad logic essentially ignores mine and others' points and incorrectly and indirectly labels the wagon as lacking any scum tells.
It is certainly possible that you were planning on rereading and reevaluating arguments but that doesn't make me feel better about your backing off of Lowell under the face of pressure, voting some one else and then just as suddenly unvoting EEM.
I think I'll have more to say but im a bit busy now.

[Diamondilium]

@Diamond:
To simplify this, would it be fair to say that your suspicions on me are ultimately based on your statement "it didn't seem as if Hero had genuinely believed in his case against Lowell."? Most of the rest of what you said in post 217 seems to be issues related to the fact that I believe I'd already refuted the argument you made, and that I did so by pointing out how things I'd already said were misinterpreted. Assuming I'm right, which I guess I might not be, that would mean the reasoning and/or reading leading to the accusations was poor. I'll answer you once I know the specifics; could you make a list, with the dependencies (as you see them) of your arguments made clear?
The part about unvoting Lowell doesn't work. I felt that my vote was most useful on people other than Lowell; I'm not going to hinder myself in looking for the scum just because you might interpret my changing my vote as scummy. That goes for my first vote, my other past votes, my next vote, and future votes (with the understanding that I'll be careful in possible LYLO.)

My central argument is comprised of both the fact that it didn't seem as if you actually believed in your case and were not as suspicious at it appeared to be. Agreeing that bad logic wasn't necessarily scummy, and then using Lowell's bad logic as the basis for many of your points made me think that you don't actually find Lowell scummy for the points you listed. I also had thought at the time that you had made point #3 on the spot and was just using it to make your case look substantial to others.
Later on, after Semi had voted, you unvoted Lowell and pursued others. When you were done pursuing EEM you hadn't revoted Lowell. This made me think that you were backing off under pressure.
Looking at this case in summation, I see that my initial feeling of scumminess should have died off by now. My thoughts on point #3 were wrong; I didn't take into consideration that you found the specific circumstances surrounding Lowell's bad logic may have made you think he was scum; I really didn't take your degree of suspicion on Lowell into account. The only thing I can hold against you is how you acted with your vote as the wagon started to build, but that point isn't very strong. With that,

Unvote

.
I am gonna a do a reread in the near future and give my thoughts on all of the players.

[Diamondilium]

sorry i wont be able to make a substantial post today

[Diamondilium]

Amished- Townish
He came in sort of late, but when he did, I got a town read on him. He seemed to be unafraid to stand by his opinions despite criticism paticularly from DGB and EEM on pages 7-8. The tone of post 181 wreaks of righteous indignance something I would expect much more from a townie than scum.

DrippingGoofball- Neutral Leaning Townish
She hasn't provided a lot of analysis- that seems to be a playstyle thing- but it isn't leaving me with a lot to analyze. I like how she uses here votes to "rattle cages" and has pro-town intentions there, but I am not particularly fond of her recent behavior.

Only because I don't think a Musher wagon will get traction, and because I find Lowell slightly scummier than Herodotus (though I reckon I don't find either particularly scummy),

unvote, vote: Lowell

I think voting for some one who you don't find scummy and blatantly stating that you don't find this person "particularly scummy" is well useless; you might as well not be voting.
Having tried to get a wagon on musher is well, actually protown in my eyes. Therefore, I am going to settle my read on you as neutral leaning town.

evilevilmatt- scummish
After only a 2 posts from Semi that EEM viewed as town, he was already ready to give Semi the gun. As the game progressed, EEM didn't seem as sure about anything else including the lynch. So why was he so willingly so very early on to give the gun to a player, but so willing lynch early on? EEM's later explanation was that he thought of the same idea of Semi and therefore concluded that Semi was not only logical but townie. In that same post (post 61), he reiterates his dislike of directing the gun owner and mentions that using the gunshot like an extra lynch gives the scum the chance to orchestrate a mislynch. If he is so afraid of having the scum mislynch, then why wasn't he more cautious with his gun vote since that is effectively giving a player the ability to kill another? Later on, he votes Amished saying that he would have done so before, but didn't because agreeing with DGB felt dirty. That is not a good reason to not vote for some one you feel is scummy; this really takes away from the genuineness of your vote.

Herodotus- Neutral Leaning Scum
I've already explained my thoughts against him. I feel that he is scummy because of his voting placement after being under pressure and I guess the residue of scumminess I had originally felt towards him when I first made my case.

More Later

[Diamondilium]

kabenon007- I don't know why but after reading his posts again and again I can't seem to get a solid read on him.

kieraen- Judging entirely based on Gateway's play, he is townish in my book. Gateway played like I would expect a newb townie to play, overeager. Not only was he excited to give Semi the gun (which he thought was a very good move) but he gave analysis on all players unusually early in the lynching part of the day.

Lowell- As I mentioned about his first vote on Hero seemed to have genuine conviction with it. He seems to be utterly afraid of confusion amongst the town, so I'm also giving him townie points for that. Looking through some of his posts; he seems to have pro town intentions.

Musher333- Didn't say much except an OMGUS vote on DGB for crunching down on lurkers. I can't really judge whether the OMGUS was venemous or in done in self-righteous indignance from the post.
OozingGolfBall- Similar to DGB's posting style except active lurks.

Rishi- Lurking- need more to analyze.

semioldguy- He adds to discussion, presents original helpful ideas. Very townie except it bothers me that he seemed to suddenly switched from using the gun shot as a secondary lynch with a few exceptions(before he had the gun) to almost using it entirely at his own discretion.

[Diamondilium]

Bolded mine.

Diamond, would you say this is a fair representation then of your likely scum? (based off your last two posts)

1) EEM (Scummish in Diamond's words)
2) Hero (Neutral leaning scum)
3) Musher
4) Rishi
5) Oozing
6) Kabennon
7) Dripping
8) Amished
9) semioldguy
10) kieraen
11) Lowell

1) EEM (Scummish in Diamond's words)
2) Hero (Neutral leaning scum)
3) Oozing (When I said he active lurks it was meant to be a point against him)
4) Rishi Musher Kabennon
7) Dripping
8) semioldguy
9) kieraen
10) Amished
11) Lowell

Just going by how you described people, that looks about right if needed to be in a list. One thing that I noticed that seemed like a discrepancy was your view of EEM and kieraen/gateway. You commend Gateway for wanting to give SOG the gun, but attack EEM for the same thing. They both ended up giving it to SOG due to the fact that they thought he was pro-town so I don't really see how the two of them can be that far apart while throwing that as a part of your basis for how scummy they are in your eyes.

Look at the way they approached the situation and their play thereafter; its entirely different. Gateway had the mark of an newb townie very eager to play and get on with the game. EEM on the other hand drew a quick conclusion early on but the rest of his play didn't reflect such behavior. So, yes, their initial moves were the same but that wasn't all there was to analyze.

After seeing the rest of your analysis and seeing that difference, I looked at the rest of your reasons for thinking EEM is scummy and this stood out.

In that same post (post 61), he reiterates his dislike of directing the gun owner and mentions that using the gunshot like an extra lynch gives the scum the chance to orchestrate a mislynch. If he is so afraid of having the scum mislynch, then why wasn't he more cautious with his gun vote since that is effectively giving a player the ability to kill another?

Which I feel to be a weak reason. His stance has always been clear to me about the gun. It has to go to someone, so give it to somebody you think is pro-town. Trust the judgement of said somebody felt to be pro-town, and don't try to tell them what to do as the town as a whole has people lying (scum) and therefore something that should be a pro-town action can turn into a scum action without really knowing. Therefore in my eyes allowing the PR to choose their own action is definitely more pro-town than you make it out to be. It looks like to me as though he's making the one person with the power accountable, and removing chances for the scum *as a whole* (regardless of SOG's alignment, since there's more than 1 scum if SOG happened to be scum) to influence the kill.

Yeah, he wanted to give it to some one pro-town so the scum wouldn't have nearly as much of an influence. The problem here is that he was so quick to decide that Semi was pro-town so early on.

Then after that (below EEM on the list) it seems to me like you're more neutral given that you've unvoted hero as well. After that, it's lurkers that you're neutral on. The lack of suspects is mighty concerning to me, as in my games as scum I've found it hard to pick out scummy actions for people you know to be town. I'm definitely keeping my eye on you.

Semi: What do you think about Diamond's scum list?

Looking back at my arguments against EEM, I noticed something that could be a source of confusion:

evilevilmatt- scummish
After only a 2 posts from Semi that EEM viewed as town, he was already ready to give Semi the gun. As the game progressed, EEM didn't seem as sure about anything else including the lynch. So why was he so willingly so very early on to give the gun to a player, but not so willing lynch early on? EEM's later explanation was that he thought of the same idea of Semi and therefore concluded that Semi was not only logical but townie. In that same post (post 61), he reiterates his dislike of directing the gun owner and mentions that using the gunshot like an extra lynch gives the scum the chance to orchestrate a mislynch. If he is so afraid of having the scum mislynch, then why wasn't he more cautious with his gun vote since that is effectively giving a player the ability to kill another? Later on, he votes Amished saying that he would have done so before, but didn't because agreeing with DGB felt dirty. That is not a good reason to not vote for some one you feel is scummy; this really takes away from the genuineness of your vote.

Anyway, Amished is right about the deadline being close up. I'll go ahead and vote.

Vote: EEM

[Diamondilium]

While I prefer a EEM or a Hero lynch, I don't think that's going to happen at the current deadline and I do not want to have a no-lynch. Therefore, I find a lurker lynch perfectly acceptable. Of the lurkers, Musher seems to be the most likely to be lynched based on how many votes he has currently. Therefore,

vote: Musher

[Diamondilium]

While I prefer a EEM or a Hero lynch, I don't think that's going to happen at the current deadline and I do not want to have a no-lynch. Therefore, I find a lurker lynch perfectly acceptable. Of the lurkers, Musher seems to be the most likely to be lynched based on how many votes he has currently. Therefore,

vote: Musher

I think even without the extension, it was a bit early to use that reasoning for your vote. There were 2.5 days left at the time; couldn't you have switched your vote to Musher on May 8th (the day before the deadline) if the EEM lynch wasn't going to happen?
If we get close to deadline with no other option, I'll probably switch to Rising(a.k.a. Musher,) but I'd prefer to lynch someone I think is more likely to be scum. Also, I find two of the players on his wagon to be independently scummy (though I don't suppose that both of them are scum.)

I can't post everyday so voting at that point isn't early. Now, if there was an extension before that time, I would not have done that. Since there is an extension now and Musher is being replaced by some one able to contribute, I don't see his lynch as satisfactory.

Unvote, Vote: EEM

.
Hero, now that Musher has been replaced, why are you still willing to switch your vote to him? The point of lynching Musher is to kill off a lurker but it doesn't seem as if that is going to be the case any more.

[Diamondilium]

I was going to vote Rishi had the situation ended up like the one with Musher; however, now that he is posting I see no reason to vote him.
At first I found Rishi's case to be quite convincing but upon looking at SOG's explanations, I feel that it has no merit. I also feel like SOG's arguments against Rishi (avoiding questions, misrep) don't have any merit either.

[Diamondilium]

EEM isn't a good place to have my vote for it seems it is not gaining any traction. Therefore I'll put my vote on Rising Phoenix because I don't agree with a Lowell lynch.

Unvote, Vote:RisingPhoenix

[Diamondilium]

Also, I forgot to mention that it seems as if Rising won't be adding anything useful due to real-life constraints and not reading big posts.

[Diamondilium]

Finals week coming up... I'll try to post once every day or 2.

[Diamondilium]

Sorry Hero but I don't think I'll be able to respond just yet; I should have plenty of time tomorrow though.
Anyway, EEM is clearly fishing.

Vote: EEM

[Diamondilium]

Sorry, but I wont be in town for the entiriety of next week.

[Diamondilium]

@Diamond:
When you have time, please reread post 247. Do you find his recap to accurately represent the things people have said in the thread?

Not really.

Why did you think that "Having tried to get a wagon on musher is well, actually protown in my eyes." Musher had failed to post after a prod, so (1) he was already due to be replaced, and (2) there was no way for the wagon to pressure him to do anything. http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 97#1651997

That may be how you perceive it but that did not seem to be the case with Lowell; he seemed to believe that pushing that wagon would lead to some fruition.

Looking through some of his posts; he [Lowell] seems to have pro town intentions.

I don't see this at all.

Bolded mine.